Shredder
Life Member
Still waiting on a good response as to why...sounds about like this democrat on Healthcare
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoE1R-xH5To
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoE1R-xH5To
IBA supports feeding baiting bill
- Thread starter earthscratcher
- Start date
-
- Tags
- None
dbltree
Super Moderator
That's not possible Brian...the IDNR knows that the IBA is a voice to be reckoned with and so they called on them and they will always call on them. That means WE THE PEOPLE have to have a say...right?...you and I ARE the IBA...they are not some evil hidden communist folks...they are hardworking Iowa deer hunters. The people we elected work hard, they give selflessly....but what did you (not picking on you Brian...I'm talking about ALL of you) do??????????????? Did you make any phone calls to volunteer help? Did you offer to attend meetings? Did you send an email now and then asking Tom or Randy or anyone what you could do to help?
Without the IBA you wouldn't even know about this and I would add that this thread was not started by the IBA...instead it was brought up by someone who admitted to not caring enough about this subject to attend the meeting????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't just leave the work to someone else...step up to the plate and have a say! Everyone could have been at the meeting...ALL of you...but instead you want to beat up the good people who took time out of their schedule to go.
Look folks...if you hate this proposal then fight it! Contact the IDNR and legislators and fight it! If you feel you want better representation through the IBA...then run for office! Volunteer to help, but please people...don't berate those who tried hard to do what they felt was right.
Sorry for the rant but doggone it people I stand up for hardworking folks who volunteer and do their best...don't blame them...because you didn't care enough to help out.
Focus on the concern now, use your energies to fight the proposal itself because the IBA isn't "something" it's good people...with names and faces and when you see them at the Classic...go up and shake their hand and thank them for their hard work and...ask them how you can help out in the future...
Windwalker
Life Member
If deer can transfer brucella to cattle it can be passed from cattle to deer too. Maybe the next step all salt blocks will be banned ? Deer jump into cattle lotts and eat at night right with cattle.If its comming it can be slowed but not stopped .Most likely to come from high wire game farms. If something is to really to be done about all this BS then all high wire game farms should be banned from the state to stop what will happen eventually.
Don't feel bad nanny, I was left off the list too. IBA knew that this was a heated topic (as it was brought up last year) and should have stayed neutral or opposed it because it lacks scientific backing. There shouldn't be a deer left alive in Texas and dozens of other States and Providences if baiting/feeding spread diseases like the IDNR is trying to make us believe. If this passes I feel the fallout from the IBA will be unprecidented because they took the position to support it. I have to say I am very disappointed in the IBA for taking the position of support because the dozen people I have pursuaded to join over the last couple years will not be renewing if this thing passes. It's hard to convince people to join organizations and I have really tried hard to sell the IBA to friends, family and aquaintances as the one organization that is really looking out for us. Now my credibility will be in question. This STINKS!
I have a question for those that say food plots are ok but baiting/feeding is not. Those whose whole premise for their argument is that food plots are over a much bigger area vs feeding/baiting. What if you spread a bushel of corn over an acre of land with an atv spreader. Now would you change your position? Getting pretty nit picky guys. Food plots will be next if concentrating deer and disease spread is the IDNR reason for this bill.
nannyslayer
New Member
That's not possible Brian...the IDNR knows that the IBA is a voice to be reckoned with and so they called on them and they will always call on them. That means WE THE PEOPLE have to have a say...right?...you and I ARE the IBA...they are not some evil hidden communist folks...they are hardworking Iowa deer hunters. The people we elected work hard, they give selflessly....but what did you (not picking on you Brian...I'm talking about ALL of you) do??????????????? Did you make any phone calls to volunteer help? Did you offer to attend meetings? Did you send an email now and then asking Tom or Randy or anyone what you could do to help?
Without the IBA you wouldn't even know about this and I would add that this thread was not started by the IBA...instead it was brought up by someone who admitted to not caring enough about this subject to attend the meeting????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't just leave the work to someone else...step up to the plate and have a say! Everyone could have been at the meeting...ALL of you...but instead you want to beat up the good people who took time out of their schedule to go.
Look folks...if you hate this proposal then fight it! Contact the IDNR and legislators and fight it! If you feel you want better representation through the IBA...then run for office! Volunteer to help, but please people...don't berate those who tried hard to do what they felt was right.
Sorry for the rant but doggone it people I stand up for hardworking folks who volunteer and do their best...don't blame them...because you didn't care enough to help out.
Focus on the concern now, use your energies to fight the proposal itself because the IBA isn't "something" it's good people...with names and faces and when you see them at the Classic...go up and shake their hand and thank them for their hard work and...ask them how you can help out in the future...
Thanks for the reply Paul, and this is my last post on the subject. I'm not going to waste anymore brain cells on this website debating, as really it does not one bit of good anyways.
Yes, I did know about the bill in place, and had contacted my state representative about it. A few emails back and fourth, and I kind of knew wich direction the bill was heading, and I put the heat on who I thought was the appropriate personal. If you need my emails as evidence, well by gosh I'll send them to you.
What I didn't know is, an organization (yes, I know full of volunteers) did nothing in the way of asking the members on what they thought of the bill. The board of the IBA is elected, much like our government officials, and I guess I depended on them to keep me "somewhat" informed on issue's that they are going to be supporting. I know they maybe volunteer's, but they still charge me to be a member.
But I will continue to do my own research and do my own emails, as I hope every voting Iowan on here does the same. One thing that really, really scares me about this particular bill is, this is the same way IL started out as. First, ban feeding. Wait, loss of revenue, so better up the NR tags a little. Wow, that made us a little more money, so lets make a loop hole for landowners and lease holders, and up the tags a bit more. Need I say more? I know, I know, people are going to jump on me right and left about that this bill has nothing to do with anything like that, but just remember, IL started out the sameway.
So yes Paul, you are right, I did nothing on the subject and I am going to grin and bear it for the IBA. Good luck in the future on your adventure's, and hope you get your tresspassing problem solved.
BW
SaskGuy
Active Member
WOW!!! What a read. This one caught fire. I love threads like this when I can look at them with no emotion, lots of good posts.
My original suspicion was "they need to ban this if baiting for hunting is banned, it's impossible to monitor what's what" I still think that's gotta play a role.
My original suspicion was "they need to ban this if baiting for hunting is banned, it's impossible to monitor what's what" I still think that's gotta play a role.
singlecoyote
Proud member of the IBA
Food Plots for Pheasants Provide Needed Shelter
04/18/2009Boone – Each winter, food plots of corn, sorghum, or other grains are used by all kinds of wildlife to help them survive. Well-designed food plots also provide important cover and additional food to help pheasant, quail, and other wildlife survive, especially during a period of heavy snow.
“There have been few documented cases of pheasants actually starving to death in Iowa,” said Todd Bogenschutz, upland wildlife research biologist with the Iowa DNR. “Virtually all of Iowa’s winter mortality is attributed to severe winter storms with the birds freezing to death.” With next winter in mind, now is the time to begin planning food plots.
So why plant food plots for pheasants if they seldom starve in winter? First, food plots provide winter habitat as well as food. In fact, if properly designed and large enough, the habitat created by a food plot is much more beneficial to wildlife than the food itself. Second, food plots allow pheasants to obtain a meal quickly thereby limiting their exposure to predators and maximizing their energy reserves.
“If hens have good fat supplies coming out of the winter, they are more likely to nest successfully,” said Bogenschutz. Food plots also provide habitat and food for many other species like deer, turkey, partridge, squirrels, and songbirds.
Feeding Pheasants and Quail? Feed Your Next Habitat Project Instead.
Feeding is a poor substitute for good Habitat—the long term solution to winter survival.
Another Tough Winter-- Again in 2009/2010, harsh winter conditions have struck Iowa in the heart of the pheasant and quail range. Hunters and conservationists are naturally concerned about survival in this difficult winter and are asking "Should we be feeding game birds?" The answer is that we must think far past the crisis we face right now.
There is a lesson to be learned from a bad winter. It is that successfully carrying pheasants and quail through for spring breeding depends on quality thermal habitat and well designed food resources that also provide cover. Take a look at your best winter habitat and see if it is working out for the birds. If it is all blown in - then you need better cover. Funds invested this coming spring in establishing high quality winter habitat will yield far greater results and better winter survival in the future than will temporary feeding right now. Start planning food & cover projects for upland game birds for next spring.
Why Not Feed?--When heavy winter snows hit and temperatures go into the deep freeze, questions always arise about feeding. This well-intentioned practice is not without problems, however, and may actually harm pheasants and quail:
- Many artificial feeding locations end up exposing birds to predation, especially those located near avian predator perch trees.
- Poorly-placed feeders may draw game birds away from protective winter cover, and this may actually add to mortality. On the other hand, placing food in areas very close to quail may spook the birds, causing them to relocate elsewhere and expend precious energy.
- Pheasants and (particularly) quail are less mobile in winter, and are unlikely to find food that has been placed away from primary winter cover.
singlecoyote
Proud member of the IBA
If herd health is truly your goal (and not trail cam pics) there are other ways to help other than mineral blocks and corn piles:
"Many areas of the country lack specific minerals and nutrients that can be provided by planting certain types of plants. Biologists also know that throughout the year bucks, does and fawns have very different nutritional needs and certain plant preferences. So, how do hunters improve a deer's nutritional health? The first method is the enhancement or fertilization of native plants. The second is the establishment of food plots."
http://iowawhitetail.com/forum/showthread.php?p=400590#post400590
Seems to me like the IBA did ask for input...
Focker, OUT.
"Many areas of the country lack specific minerals and nutrients that can be provided by planting certain types of plants. Biologists also know that throughout the year bucks, does and fawns have very different nutritional needs and certain plant preferences. So, how do hunters improve a deer's nutritional health? The first method is the enhancement or fertilization of native plants. The second is the establishment of food plots."
http://iowawhitetail.com/forum/showthread.php?p=400590#post400590
Seems to me like the IBA did ask for input...
Focker, OUT.
Last edited:
magnus
PMA Member
If IDNR has such cutting-edge, earth-shattering research to justify this ban on minerals or supplemental feeding as written in 481A.41 (arguably the most restrictive deer management regulation in any state or province in North America), WHY hasn't their evidence been shared with Iowa's sportsmen in the form of a press release, post on the DNR website, newspapers, NOTHING?? It just doesn't make sense and I can't help but believe there's more going on here than just good deer management. Only wish we knew exactly what and why........
earthscratcher
New Member
dbltree,i did make phone calls to volunteer help,offered to attend meetings,even thanked the fishbonker for his service.
this thread was started by the IBA because i am a member just like you!!!
a just stated that it would have been a waste of my time,talking about baiting feeding stuff for 2 hours,there are bigger fish to fry!!
until i see some good facts i am not drinking the kool-aid
heard tonight that the NWTF is now supporting the bill to
the public dnr meeting at the classic should be a good one!!!!
this thread was started by the IBA because i am a member just like you!!!
a just stated that it would have been a waste of my time,talking about baiting feeding stuff for 2 hours,there are bigger fish to fry!!
until i see some good facts i am not drinking the kool-aid
heard tonight that the NWTF is now supporting the bill to
the public dnr meeting at the classic should be a good one!!!!
Fishbonker
Life Member
Wow. 17 pages of replies. Talk about your hot button topics. I opened up the thread tonight to see how many pages there were and went directly to page 17. The last post was from dbltree. I’m sure there will be plenty more before I get this posted.
All I had to do was read Paul’s post to know I didn’t want to go back through and read all 17 pages. Last time I looked in the mirror I didn’t have horns, cloven hooves, a tail or carry a pitchfork.
OK, let me start with the 2 bottom lines from the presentation and ramble my way back up. I am trying not to add to or subtract from anything that Dale, Willie, Craig or Tom said. I am trying to keep my personal commentary out and what they said in. That way you can draw your own inferences and come to your own conclusions.
Bottom line 1: The DNR is trying to unring a bell that should never have been rung in the first place. Deer have been growing to record size in Iowa long before supplemental feeding became the rage.
Bottom line 2: The DNR Is trying to make their officers more available for other investigations by making it less time consuming to catch someone hunting over bait.
Back to bottom line #1. There is no scientific, peer reviewed research that says supplemental feeding changes herd dynamics whether it is birth weight of fawns or antler size of bucks. There is scientific, peer reviewed research from Michigan that shows a spatial relationship between the density of deer feeding stations and the spread of TB.
Food plots do not present a risk for disease transmission because the deer eat and move on. They do not spend time licking the same spot over and over. A discussion of prions, CWD transmission and deer social behavior ensued with nothing new that hasn’t been discussed in other threads on this and other sites.
Old mineral sites will always be a concern. There seemed to be CO discretion involved here but my take home message was they aren’t really sure what to do with them. They are relying on land owners or who ever put them in to do their best to fill them in or cover them up. (My personal bias here is if you lugged the stuff out there you can lug in some fill.) Again a personal feeling was if a good faith effort was made to clean it up or restrict access to an old site you wouldn’t have any problems but that was a personal feeling.
They talked again about how devastating it would be to the deer herd in Iowa if TB, Brucellosis or CWD were to be found in Iowa. It would be kill first and ask questions later. They firmly believe that these diseases can and will be spread more easily by continued indiscriminate use of mineral sites. They made a point that if the State was forced to choose between livestock safety and deer the deer would lose.
One of their biggest fears is the transport of deer into an unlicensed (or maybe it is registered) “deer farm” (my words not theirs) that is untested for disease. The deer escapes, finds a mineral lick and leaves his calling card for years. They went on to say the State Veterinarian is working with the DOT by stopping livestock trailers to check for deer being shipped into the state. (Deer breeding farms are controlled by the Department of Agriculture). It happens. Remember that “albino” deer recently shot in here in Iowa?
Mineral put out for livestock would continue as is, as long it is what the producer normally does. Producers don’t carry a sack of mineral into the woods so their cattle will use it. There was a question here by a Board member that I didn’t understand, it had to do with rotational grazing and feed left in the pasture longer than 30 days and the answer “if it is your normal practice then it is OK” I probably didn’t hear it as much as didn’t understand it.
Here is a good place to bridge into bottom line #2. Why the 50 yard rule? The answer: Because we had to start somewhere. They said they have worked closely with urban areas to prohibit wildlife feeding and some areas have passed ordinances against it.
They shared a few dozen pictures of wildlife feeding that if this bill passes would become baiting and therefore illegal. I have asked to share these pics but have not received a reply. You absolutely would not believe the brazen baiting that goes on. The big difference is to prove baiting you have to catch the guy in his stand or blind with a weapon. If the bill is passed it will be baiting, period. Mr. Cutts described how thin the COs were spread. He related several stories about being dropped off to watch a bait pile by another CO that had to leave his district (leaving two districts underserved) so he, CO Cutts, could try to catch the poacher. Here is another personal opinion based on the discussion, the reason he gets dropped off and sets up surveillance is they actually have to see the poacher in the stand or catch him in his blind with a weapon. If a poacher saw or heard him coming and threw his weapon out of the stand or out of the blind or climbed down or got out the blind the CO may still be able to make his case but he would have to spend time at the courthouse for a hearing taking away even more of his time. The way I understand the scenario, if the law were to pass, if the CO was alerted to a bait pile and found a pile of fresh corn (or whatever) in a place where or time when fresh corn would not be in that location he would go have a chat with the land owner, try to find out who had placed it there and go have a chat with them. Here again CO discretion may come into play. A return visit to the site to see if the bait had been removed would most certainly happen. There are still a lot of “what ifs” a guy could come up with in regard to this but it makes it much easier for the CO to do their jobs and takes most of the gray out between black and white.
I did ask roughly what percentage of time a CO puts into busting baiters and I did not get a hard number. One number that they shared was 15% of baiting was on public ground. I found that amazing. I thought it would be less.
Another fact they shared that made me think a little bit was the elk feeding going on in western states in the winter. I always thought it was to help the animals survive. They feed the elk to keep them “yarded up” and away from cattle to prevent disease transmission.
Another question I asked was is there any kind of exemption to feeding deer during a harsh winter. The short answer is yes. The long answer is Mother Nature has been taking care of the deer herd much longer than we have. A story was told about a farmer who had depredation tags. The local CO or area depredation guy stopped at the farmers house one day as he was taking hay and corn out to a field. Seems he felt sorry for the hungry deer he was trying so hard to kill earlier in the year.
Another take home message that was repeated over and over was it is more important to improve the habitat than it is to feed the deer.
They also showed a picture of what was aflatoxin corn (just looked moldy to me but I wouldn’t know what aflatoxin corn looked like) and went on to explain that aflatoxin is either harmless or very mildly irritating to deer. I can’t remember which it was but it was not deadly. But to other wildlife, specifically turkeys and pheasants, that would eat the corn it is most definitely deadly.
So now you ask after reading this “what compelled the IBA to support this bill”? It was the challenge to do what was right not expedient. It was the challenge to make the tough decision not take the easy way out. It was the challenge to look into and be an advocate of the future. It was the challenge to try to change a practice that has taken far less than a generation to become commonplace and may take far greater than a generation to fix.
It was the right thing to do and I’ll do it again. It is so very sad that the IBA may lose many many great members and I may very well lose some friends over this. Ask yourself if you are doing what is good for the deer or just good for yourself.
The ‘Bonker
All I had to do was read Paul’s post to know I didn’t want to go back through and read all 17 pages. Last time I looked in the mirror I didn’t have horns, cloven hooves, a tail or carry a pitchfork.
OK, let me start with the 2 bottom lines from the presentation and ramble my way back up. I am trying not to add to or subtract from anything that Dale, Willie, Craig or Tom said. I am trying to keep my personal commentary out and what they said in. That way you can draw your own inferences and come to your own conclusions.
Bottom line 1: The DNR is trying to unring a bell that should never have been rung in the first place. Deer have been growing to record size in Iowa long before supplemental feeding became the rage.
Bottom line 2: The DNR Is trying to make their officers more available for other investigations by making it less time consuming to catch someone hunting over bait.
Back to bottom line #1. There is no scientific, peer reviewed research that says supplemental feeding changes herd dynamics whether it is birth weight of fawns or antler size of bucks. There is scientific, peer reviewed research from Michigan that shows a spatial relationship between the density of deer feeding stations and the spread of TB.
Food plots do not present a risk for disease transmission because the deer eat and move on. They do not spend time licking the same spot over and over. A discussion of prions, CWD transmission and deer social behavior ensued with nothing new that hasn’t been discussed in other threads on this and other sites.
Old mineral sites will always be a concern. There seemed to be CO discretion involved here but my take home message was they aren’t really sure what to do with them. They are relying on land owners or who ever put them in to do their best to fill them in or cover them up. (My personal bias here is if you lugged the stuff out there you can lug in some fill.) Again a personal feeling was if a good faith effort was made to clean it up or restrict access to an old site you wouldn’t have any problems but that was a personal feeling.
They talked again about how devastating it would be to the deer herd in Iowa if TB, Brucellosis or CWD were to be found in Iowa. It would be kill first and ask questions later. They firmly believe that these diseases can and will be spread more easily by continued indiscriminate use of mineral sites. They made a point that if the State was forced to choose between livestock safety and deer the deer would lose.
One of their biggest fears is the transport of deer into an unlicensed (or maybe it is registered) “deer farm” (my words not theirs) that is untested for disease. The deer escapes, finds a mineral lick and leaves his calling card for years. They went on to say the State Veterinarian is working with the DOT by stopping livestock trailers to check for deer being shipped into the state. (Deer breeding farms are controlled by the Department of Agriculture). It happens. Remember that “albino” deer recently shot in here in Iowa?
Mineral put out for livestock would continue as is, as long it is what the producer normally does. Producers don’t carry a sack of mineral into the woods so their cattle will use it. There was a question here by a Board member that I didn’t understand, it had to do with rotational grazing and feed left in the pasture longer than 30 days and the answer “if it is your normal practice then it is OK” I probably didn’t hear it as much as didn’t understand it.
Here is a good place to bridge into bottom line #2. Why the 50 yard rule? The answer: Because we had to start somewhere. They said they have worked closely with urban areas to prohibit wildlife feeding and some areas have passed ordinances against it.
They shared a few dozen pictures of wildlife feeding that if this bill passes would become baiting and therefore illegal. I have asked to share these pics but have not received a reply. You absolutely would not believe the brazen baiting that goes on. The big difference is to prove baiting you have to catch the guy in his stand or blind with a weapon. If the bill is passed it will be baiting, period. Mr. Cutts described how thin the COs were spread. He related several stories about being dropped off to watch a bait pile by another CO that had to leave his district (leaving two districts underserved) so he, CO Cutts, could try to catch the poacher. Here is another personal opinion based on the discussion, the reason he gets dropped off and sets up surveillance is they actually have to see the poacher in the stand or catch him in his blind with a weapon. If a poacher saw or heard him coming and threw his weapon out of the stand or out of the blind or climbed down or got out the blind the CO may still be able to make his case but he would have to spend time at the courthouse for a hearing taking away even more of his time. The way I understand the scenario, if the law were to pass, if the CO was alerted to a bait pile and found a pile of fresh corn (or whatever) in a place where or time when fresh corn would not be in that location he would go have a chat with the land owner, try to find out who had placed it there and go have a chat with them. Here again CO discretion may come into play. A return visit to the site to see if the bait had been removed would most certainly happen. There are still a lot of “what ifs” a guy could come up with in regard to this but it makes it much easier for the CO to do their jobs and takes most of the gray out between black and white.
I did ask roughly what percentage of time a CO puts into busting baiters and I did not get a hard number. One number that they shared was 15% of baiting was on public ground. I found that amazing. I thought it would be less.
Another fact they shared that made me think a little bit was the elk feeding going on in western states in the winter. I always thought it was to help the animals survive. They feed the elk to keep them “yarded up” and away from cattle to prevent disease transmission.
Another question I asked was is there any kind of exemption to feeding deer during a harsh winter. The short answer is yes. The long answer is Mother Nature has been taking care of the deer herd much longer than we have. A story was told about a farmer who had depredation tags. The local CO or area depredation guy stopped at the farmers house one day as he was taking hay and corn out to a field. Seems he felt sorry for the hungry deer he was trying so hard to kill earlier in the year.
Another take home message that was repeated over and over was it is more important to improve the habitat than it is to feed the deer.
They also showed a picture of what was aflatoxin corn (just looked moldy to me but I wouldn’t know what aflatoxin corn looked like) and went on to explain that aflatoxin is either harmless or very mildly irritating to deer. I can’t remember which it was but it was not deadly. But to other wildlife, specifically turkeys and pheasants, that would eat the corn it is most definitely deadly.
So now you ask after reading this “what compelled the IBA to support this bill”? It was the challenge to do what was right not expedient. It was the challenge to make the tough decision not take the easy way out. It was the challenge to look into and be an advocate of the future. It was the challenge to try to change a practice that has taken far less than a generation to become commonplace and may take far greater than a generation to fix.
It was the right thing to do and I’ll do it again. It is so very sad that the IBA may lose many many great members and I may very well lose some friends over this. Ask yourself if you are doing what is good for the deer or just good for yourself.
The ‘Bonker
dbltree
Super Moderator
Thanks for clarifying some information Tom and also I want to personally thank you for your giving of your time to attend the meeting...I'm sure you had plenty of other things you would have rather done.
To those that didn't receive an email it's no doubt because you haven't been added to the list and the best way to be on the list is to send and email to our IBA president asking to be added.
In regards to feeding almost every biologist I have ever talked to including those with Pheasants Forever and NWTF say feeding wildlife is a dangerous practice.
Avian Pox for instance spreads rapidly through both song and game birds where they are being fed from bird feeders causing 10 X more death then starvation.
I believe that the right thing is being done here but I also respect that each of you have every right to disagree and I urge you to contact the IDNR and legislators with your opinions and questions.
Have a great day friends...:way:
To those that didn't receive an email it's no doubt because you haven't been added to the list and the best way to be on the list is to send and email to our IBA president asking to be added.
Friends...sometimes we just have to agree to disagree...shake hands and move on but please be respectful to those who have devoted time on your behalf.
In regards to feeding almost every biologist I have ever talked to including those with Pheasants Forever and NWTF say feeding wildlife is a dangerous practice.
Avian Pox for instance spreads rapidly through both song and game birds where they are being fed from bird feeders causing 10 X more death then starvation.
I believe that the right thing is being done here but I also respect that each of you have every right to disagree and I urge you to contact the IDNR and legislators with your opinions and questions.
Have a great day friends...:way:
flugge
Well-Known Member
My big question next is, lets say this passes, and its all illegal. When does it exactly take effect, and when would the public be notified? Lets say voting doesnt take place till June, but I already had mine out, and dont find out until the new regs are out in late august or september..Technically I am illegal until then, even though I didnt know?? Seems a bit of a grey area....just asking...
I understand what they are trying to do..but then again, they say they cant get rid of the late doe season in a year, how can they take this away just like that... again, just asking, not trying to piss anyone off.
I understand what they are trying to do..but then again, they say they cant get rid of the late doe season in a year, how can they take this away just like that... again, just asking, not trying to piss anyone off.
loneranger
Well-Known Member
"If Forced to Choose Between Livestock Safety and Deer, the Deer Would Lose." That is the Line. Where I came from,,the deer lost. No big livestock die off from diseases. No big deer die off from disease. A further excuse to thin them dang deer.
sureshot
The Hunt Never Ends....
Bonker, it is part of a DNR officers job to go to court. Even if this bill becomes a new law, a DNR officer can still find himself in court.....its part of HiS/HER job. Also, DNR Officers in Iowa don't have it rough, believe me, I worked for the DNR for quite a few summers. Maybe if some of them (not all of them) spent less time fishing with one another they would catch more law breakers.
Bonker, did you ever speak with any biologist about this who were not employed by the IDNR? Possibly any wildlife disease biologist from ISU or another university. I will make a phone call to one of my old wildlife disease professors later this morning and ask what her opinion is on this bill. I would be very interested to hear her opinion as she studied wildlife diseases in Michigan in whitetail deer.
The reasons that you listed as to why the IBA supports this bill are what I have already heard before, and they still do not sway my opinion. Do you really honestly believe that the IBA would be 'held accountable' IF the Iowa deer herd all catches a disease and the population plummets? How many other states bait and have no issues? Hmmmm..... I think the amount of doe tags that are being allotted are already doing a fine job of demolishing our herd.
Also, take a look at the baiting poll......look at how many people are against this vs. how many are for it? Did the decision to support this bill really follow what the majority of Iowa Bowhunters want? The IBA is supposed to be in support of the beliefs of its members, correct? I know there will always be disagreements, but its clearly evident to see that the majority does not want to see this ban. Are we 'normal folk' not educated enough to make a wise decision? Yeah, I didn't speak with the DNR Officer, or the DNR biologist like you did.....but are you going to believe everything they spoon feed you? If they want to increase NR tags, 'because its best for everyone' what are you going to say? Do you realize how many of the DNR employees are non-consumptive users who don't hunt nor fish? Pretty sad. And they are some of the ones coming up with these new bills we are going to and have been seeing.
In the end I feel that some of the members here on IW are some of the hardest hunting and avid outdoorsman in the state of Iowa, and by talking to quite a few, and reading these posts, it seems that the majority of us are not in favor of this bill, yet the board members of the IBA are.......that to me doesn't make sense.
Bonker, did you ever speak with any biologist about this who were not employed by the IDNR? Possibly any wildlife disease biologist from ISU or another university. I will make a phone call to one of my old wildlife disease professors later this morning and ask what her opinion is on this bill. I would be very interested to hear her opinion as she studied wildlife diseases in Michigan in whitetail deer.
The reasons that you listed as to why the IBA supports this bill are what I have already heard before, and they still do not sway my opinion. Do you really honestly believe that the IBA would be 'held accountable' IF the Iowa deer herd all catches a disease and the population plummets? How many other states bait and have no issues? Hmmmm..... I think the amount of doe tags that are being allotted are already doing a fine job of demolishing our herd.
Also, take a look at the baiting poll......look at how many people are against this vs. how many are for it? Did the decision to support this bill really follow what the majority of Iowa Bowhunters want? The IBA is supposed to be in support of the beliefs of its members, correct? I know there will always be disagreements, but its clearly evident to see that the majority does not want to see this ban. Are we 'normal folk' not educated enough to make a wise decision? Yeah, I didn't speak with the DNR Officer, or the DNR biologist like you did.....but are you going to believe everything they spoon feed you? If they want to increase NR tags, 'because its best for everyone' what are you going to say? Do you realize how many of the DNR employees are non-consumptive users who don't hunt nor fish? Pretty sad. And they are some of the ones coming up with these new bills we are going to and have been seeing.
In the end I feel that some of the members here on IW are some of the hardest hunting and avid outdoorsman in the state of Iowa, and by talking to quite a few, and reading these posts, it seems that the majority of us are not in favor of this bill, yet the board members of the IBA are.......that to me doesn't make sense.
loneranger
Well-Known Member
I believe no matter what bills are passed, diseases are and will be here. The same call will go out from Ag Dept. Frightened citizenry, State Officials, as has gone out in neighboring States. Those Pesky Whitetails are at it again. A threat to all of us. Get rid of them. After all the hipe is settled down. Farming will still be going on, Brain disease will not be present in humans,,but deer hunting will be poor. I saw this happen where I am from.
Shredder
Life Member
From Tom's Post
Because WE had to START somewhere...so where is it going to stop??????? Letting more government control our actions is one step closer to a lack of freedom.
People have been feeding deer for years in Iowa and have yet to have a problem I have heard of...or it would have surfaced here in this post
Because WE had to START somewhere...so where is it going to stop??????? Letting more government control our actions is one step closer to a lack of freedom.
People have been feeding deer for years in Iowa and have yet to have a problem I have heard of...or it would have surfaced here in this post
jclaws
PMA Member
I dont know how much time it will save the dnr officers.They are still going to have to catch a person baiting.Last year i was going to hunt a spot and i noticed a ladder stand on the property that only two people had permission to hunt,me and another guy that never uses treestands.well it was close to the fence so i am not one to stir things up with the land owner so i just blew it off.Well on my way out i walked back by it and noticed a corn pile 5 yards away from it.I was hunting a farm but it was inside the city limits,so i called the officer that takes care of the city hunting and he called the local conservation officer.Then i called the co and he asked me if i would stay out of there for a while so he could try to catch him.He was dropped off and scoped the stand out on a number of occasions but never did catch the guy.People that are doing things illegal are still going to do the same thing as they were,and the co is still going to have to catch them in the act.If the co would have found it instead of me and he called the landowner he would have gave them my name since i am the only one who uses treestands on the property,The way it sounds now they are not going to waste there time investigating it they are just going to write a ticket.I dont think so,they are still going to have to catch the poacher in the act.
I have three trail cameras which i bought to put out in the summer over corn to see what deer are on the farm.The only time i use a camera during hunting season is on scrapes.I will then put them back out after season to see what deer made it through the hunting season.I dont believe it gives me an unfair advantage to kill the deer as some might believe.If putting food in fron of a camera during season was illegal it would not affect me one bit anyways.
I have three trail cameras which i bought to put out in the summer over corn to see what deer are on the farm.The only time i use a camera during hunting season is on scrapes.I will then put them back out after season to see what deer made it through the hunting season.I dont believe it gives me an unfair advantage to kill the deer as some might believe.If putting food in fron of a camera during season was illegal it would not affect me one bit anyways.
Looks like the same information that people haven't believed in the past. And I still don't believe this makes it any easier for a CO to ticket someone. The fact of the matter is you still have to catch them in the act. If anything this will eat up a lot of their time, because there are thousands of people who will say "screw it" and keep on putting out mineral.
I'd be curious to know how many of the board members own and manage hunting land?
I'd be curious to know how many of the board members own and manage hunting land?